I think you're going to have problems with this. It's not as easy as simply saying, "If everyone does this, the world will be a better place." Too bad, but true.

For example: I think the world would be better if all people treated other people with kindness and respect. If I wanted to make it a law that everyone needed to treat others with kindness and respect, I would need to define what it meant to be "kind" and to be "respectful." I would need to set up guidelines to determine if people's actions met the criteria for acting appropriately. I would need to determine some sort of method of enforcing my law requiring kindness and respect, including some sort of penalty for those who didn't act like my law required.

To say that all of the above would be difficult to develop and harder to enforce would be understating the situation.

I think you're going to have problems with this. It's not as
easy as simply saying, "If everyone does this, the world will be a
better place." Too bad, but true.

For example: I think the world would be better if all people
treated other people with kindness and respect. If I wanted to make
it a law that everyone needed to treat others with kindness and
respect, I would need to define what it meant to be "kind" and to
be "respectful." I would need to set up guidelines to determine if
people's actions met the criteria for acting appropriately. I would
need to determine some sort of method of enforcing my law requiring
kindness and respect, including some sort of penalty for those who
didn't act like my law required.

To say that all of the above would be difficult to develop and
harder to enforce would be understating the situation.

One law that could be imposed that would presumably make the world better would be a law or laws that forces people to use less energy. This would help the environment in the long term. However, this shows one of the problems with trying to use laws to fix things. The law would probably hurt our economy in the short term. It would also infringe on people's choices. So making laws to fix things can have unintended consequences.

Wow, this is a can of worms. I think it should be illegal for companies that receive government assistance (bailouts), declare bankruptcy, or show losses to give their executives bonuses. I also think that banks should be required to rent houses to owners who are foreclosed.

I think if there was more transparency, particularly with regard to finances, then there could be less corruption. If any money lending agency was forced to declare its profits clearly, make its fees and transaction processes fair and clear then perhaps there would be fewer people in financial distress. An interesting idea might be to abolish credit. I'm not sure if it would work, but the 'if you don't have it, don't spend it' philosophy is a good one. Not sure it will bring instant happiness though - we are a fast fix generation.

Laws designed to cut pollution have in the past helped indeed to cut pollution. They come with economic costs, but they also come with economic benefits, including benefits to the health and well-being of citizens. Imagine how many more people might have lung cancer today if the thick pollution of cities such as Pittsburgh had not been radically reduced. Imagine, too, how unattractive Pittsburgh would be as a place to establish businesses if pollution were as bad there as it once was. Laws designed to cut pollution can have very immediate economic benefits as well as some undeniable economic costs.

I agree this question is a catch 22. Much of what each individual thinks would make the world a better place stems from very personal ideals. Is it really fair to impose our ideals on others? Then, there is the regulation of such laws. Many broad ideals are difficult to regulate and monitor. One must consider the consequences and the precedent of making such a law as well. Often, laws have far reaching consequences that the writer may not have intended. Sometimes laws created for the greater good are twisted and turned. The ripple effect of things that look good on paper being implemented in the real world are often difficult to predict and even more difficult to remedy.

As you can see from the many posts, this is an extremely difficult question. The world in which we live is very complex and there are unintended implications for each law that is passed. In addition, there is the question of interpretation. And some people are great at finding loopholes. Then there is question of the proliferation of laws that can confuse people.

Anti-corruption laws are desperately needed in finance and politics in just about every country I know anything about. The problem is that to really attack corruption, you have to deal with underlying problem that causes it, which, of course, is money, and the fact that people who have it try to influence affairs in a way that benefits them. But if I had to choose one set of laws (aside from what the above posters have said about environmental issues and consumption) I think anti-corruption laws would be what I'd go with.

It would need to be an international law, but I would make offshore banking and tax-havens illegal. These 'grey area' banking facilities allow the world's most corrupt people to syphon money out of their countries beyond the reach of the authorities. It is the world's banking system for criminals, corrupt dictators and their cronies, and super-rich tax-dodgers. They are highly immoral.

First, I really appreciate that a 9th grader actually wants more laws! That is not the norm. However, a fact of the matter is this, approximately 80,000 new laws are created in a year in this country at the Federal level. The highest law of the land in the United States is the Constitution. The Consitution applies to those citizens of the U.S., not the world.

It isn't more laws that make the world better, it is people who follow the basic principles of human decency, common sense and fair play that make the world a better place. In a world of difference in every possible way, laws are only relative to the specific group who created the law. Laws in one nation or culture may not apply to another nation and culture.

International Law is a difficult realm to cordinate around the world. Unless those countries or Governments agree to follow the laws that the world establishes, the laws can not work.

The world is a better place by those who follow the laws of their land, even if those laws are seen as "unconstitutional" when measured against our own highest law of the land. It is not the amount of Laws, it is the type of laws.

In this country, it is not the laws that make us a great nation, it is the process that provides for the lawmaking. The process is not perfect and we know that because our justice system is overflowing with lawbreakers, law challengers and law changers.